Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether section 206AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, could be applied to require deduction of tax at 20% from payments made to non-residents who did not furnish PAN, notwithstanding the lower rate available under the relevant Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and section 90(2).
Analysis: The Tribunal followed the Special Bench decision holding that tax deducted at source under section 195 from payments to non-residents is to be governed by the rate specified in the applicable treaty where the treaty is more beneficial. It was held that non-resident payees were not obliged to obtain PAN in the same manner as residents, and that section 206AA, being a machinery provision, cannot override the beneficial provisions of section 90(2) and the applicable DTAA. The later furnishing of PAN by some deductees also supported reduction of the demand to that extent.
Conclusion: Section 206AA does not override the beneficial rate under the applicable DTAA in the case of non-residents without PAN, and the demand based on the higher rate was not sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: A treaty provision more beneficial to the assessee prevails over the domestic TDS machinery provision, and section 206AA cannot be applied to mandate deduction at 20% where the applicable DTAA prescribes a lower rate for non-resident recipients.